- From: Paul Prescod <paul@prescod.net>
- Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2002 07:28:19 -0700
- To: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@metalab.unc.edu>
- CC: www-tag@w3.org
Elliotte Rusty Harold wrote: > > > Consequently, I am suspicious that principles designed for good HTTP/ > FTP/etc. may be actively harmful to good SMTP (and vice versa). I do > not think this document should attempt to prescribe architecture for > SMTP in particular or e-mail in general. It's just too different. Just FYI, the concensus among people who are thinking about futuristic designs for Mail-NG is that the next SMTP should use a pull model rather than a push model, so that the person sending the message pays the price of delivery in bandwidth. Of course you need a notification mechanism to tell you WHEN to pull. Many of these people also agree that the pull part might as well use Web infrastructure (URIs and HTTP GET). Conversely, the Web infrastructure desperately needs a push notification mechanism (e.g. for cache invalidation). So I don't think that they are as different as you believe. That said, disloging a deployed protocol is extremely difficult so I don't expect it to happen soon, if ever. But it wouldn't be a bad thing to unify mail and the Web at all. Paul Prescod
Received on Tuesday, 10 September 2002 19:04:41 UTC